SC seeks Centre’s stand on gay law

NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court order decriminalising gay sex among the consenting adults has come under the scanner of the Supreme Court.

A bench comprising Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and Justice P Sathasivam on Thursday issued notices to Centre and an NGO on a PIL challenging legalisation of gay sex in the country.

The high court on a petition filed by an NGO, Naz Foundation had passed the order decriminalising gay sex among the consenting adults.

The apex court, however, refused to entertain the plea seeking a stay on the high court order saying without knowing the stand of the Centre and other concerned party it was not possible.

It posted the matter for further hearing on July 20.

The petition filed by an astrologer S K Kaushal picked holes in the high court order. Advocate Pravin Agarwal appearing for the petitioner said that the adverse impact of the high court order have started pouring in with the reports of seven cases of gay marriages in the country.

It evoked strong reactions from a bench which said that the judgement of the high court did not speak about gay marriages.

���The judgement does not speak about the marriage and only exclude such act (homosexual act among consenting adults in private) from the purview of crime���, the court remarked.

The court said that the high court judgement has only dealt with that part of the Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code which has been rarely invoked. ���Police have not been registering cases (against persons indulging in such behaviour with consent in private)���, court said adding that the legislation which has been there since 1860 has been applied in only a handful of cases.

���For over 130 years, it has been applied only in a handful of cases except those of paedophile cases���, court observed. ���For gay sex, to my knowledge, no body has been prosecuted���, Justice Balakrishnan pointed out.
When advocate Agarwal submitted that the registration of such marriages should not be allowed, the bench said: ���We have not changed the definition of marriage.���

The petition contended that homosexual acts, by all standards, were ���unnatural��� and could not be permitted. ���No one can imagine the consequences of the unnatural acts. Even animals don���t indulge in such activities,��� Mr Kaushal said in his petition.

He further said, the high court judgement would result in spread of HIV virus as ���it has been amply proven��� that the infection was contracted through such sexual acts.

���We have to look at our own scriptures to seek guidance from them and they are against such behaviour in our society. If such abnormality is permitted, then tomorrow people might seek permission for having sex with animals���, petition stated.